This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
of architecture firms elsewhere we do not allow red links. We define "notable" as being "already has an article in wikipedia." I think it is a good idea but an not inclined to start slashing & burning until posting here. I will start removing red links unless I hear an "I say, old chap, that's not how we do things here." Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 02:21, 25 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
It's usually the rule of thumb with lists of people (WP:LISTPEOPLE), but not with other lists of things such as companies. Looking back at the edit history (October 2012 seems such a long time ago) I remember it was me who checked through the redlinks and made a judgement on whether they were notable - there are some online sources I've added. In all cases, I think, the redlinks are long-standing reputable practices. They just need some additional offline sources discovered before articles could be written. There are many notable things out there that don't have Wikipedia articles yet! Sionk (talk) 03:04, 25 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
I have crossed paths with you enough so that your opinion is good enough for me. This is why I've gotten into the habit of asking first. My resources on British architectural history will probably not produce many stubs, but I will look and see. Carptrash (talk) 03:55, 25 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
